Marta Maria Blandon and Lorna Norori: "we have successfully challenged two states"

Women's Health Journal, Jan-March, 2003

On the other hand, we were not able to leave Costa Rica because the parents had to make an official declaration for the trial of the rapist. Even though Rosita's attacker was already in jail, the judge maintained that there was insufficient proof against him. Rosita and other children already had testified that he had abused and raped her, but the court was not satisfied. Why? Xenophobia, prejudice against immigrants. There was even an attempt to accuse Rosita's father of the abuse.

Our number one priority was to get them out of there, which is what the parents wanted. Finally, we did have to sneak them out clandestinely under veiled threats by the Minister of the National Child Welfare Agency who said that we might not be allowed to leave and that Rosita's custody might be taken away from her parents. But we made it to Nicaragua. Rosita was examined by a doctor, and we were able to really talk to her parents calmly and analyze the situation. We explained to them the very serious risks to Rosita's life and offered them our support whether they decided to terminate or continue the pregnancy.

Did you face similar problems in Nicaragua?

Marta: From the very beginning a strategy was developed by the members of the support group that was set up and led by the Red de Mujeres contra la Violencia and many other organizations with long experience in the issues. This coalition of the broader women's movement felt that it was the right time to lobby for an enforceable law allowing therapeutic abortion and to demand that the State take responsibility for Rosita's case. This decision coincided with a struggle to prevent the elimination of therapeutic abortion, a battle long underway in Nicaragua: the Penal Code is currently being reformulated, and "pro-life" groups are urging that the right to therapeutic abortion be removed.

[After they had made their decision], Rosita's parents presented a formal request to the Procurador Especial de la Ninez y Adolescencia (Special Ombudsperson for Children and Adolescents) and the Procurador de los Derechos Humanos (Human Rights Ombudsperson) stating that they wanted their daughter's pregnancy terminated. "We don't want her to die; she is our only daughter. Please help us. We know that she could have a clandestine abortion, but we don't want to run any risks. Please help us see that the law is fulfilled," was their plea to a fairly conservative official who was, in the end, quite sensitive to their situation. It was impressive how this painful reality became a process of growth, of appropriation of their rights, for Rosita's parents.

The Human Rights Ombudsperson then sent a letter to the Ministry of Health recommending that their case be heard. A commission of three medical authorities--who were not opposed to therapeutic abortion--were named to evaluate Rosita, and they made their decision. All this took place in a very tumultuous setting, with public declarations by the Minister of the Family and the Minister of Health, by the highest authorities of the Catholic Church, by representatives of the "pro-life" groups who warned that they would not permit an innocent to child to be killed. The Minister of Health, who was finally removed from her post, even threatened to revoke Rosita's custody from her parents.